Haswell-E: The Intel Core i7-5960X 8-core Processor Review

Revamped Enthusiast Platform

Join us at 12:30pm PT / 3:30pm ET as Intel's Matt Dunford joins us for a live stream event to discuss the release of Haswell-E and the X99 platform!! Find us at http://www.pcper.com/live!!

Sometimes writing these reviews can be pretty anti-climactic. With all of the official and leaked information released about Haswell-E over the last six to nine months, there isn't much more to divulge that can truly be called revolutionary. Yes, we are looking at the new king of the enthusiast market with an 8-core processor that not only brings a 33% increase in core count over the previous generation Ivy Bridge-E and Sandy Bridge-E platforms, but also includes the adoption of the DDR4 memory specification, which allows for high density and high speed memory subsystems.

And along with the new processor on a modified socket (though still LGA2011) comes a new chipset with some interesting new features. If you were left wanting for USB 3.0 or Thunderbolt on X79, then you are going to love what you see with X99. Did you think you needed some more SATA ports to really liven up your pool of hard drives? Retail boards are going to have you covered.

Again, just like last time, you will find a set of three processors that are coming into the market at the same time. These offerings range from the $999 price point and go down to the much more reasonable cost of $389. But this time there are more interesting decisions to be made based on specification differences in the family. Do the changes that Intel made in the sub-$1000 SKUs make it a better or worse buy for users looking to finally upgrade?

Haswell-E: A New Enthusiast Lineup from Intel

Today's launch of the Intel Core i7-5960X processor continues on the company's path of enthusiast branded parts that are built off of a subset of the workstation and server market. It is no secret that some Xeon branded processors will work in X79 motherboards and the same is true of the upcoming Haswell-EP series (with its X99 platform) launching today. As an enthusiast though, I think we can agree that it doesn't really matter how a processor like this comes about, as long as it continues to occur well into the future.

The Core i7-5960X processor is an 8-core, 16-thread design built on what is essentially the same architecture we saw released with the mainstream Haswell parts released in June of 2013. There are some important differences of course, including the lack of integrated graphics and the move from DDR3 to DDR4 for system memory. The underlying microarchitecture remains unchanged, though. Previously known as the Haswell-E platform, the Core i7-5960X continues Intel's trend of releasing enthusiast/workstation grade platforms that are based on an existing mainstream architecture.

With IVB-E platforms maxing out at a 6-core design, and the mainstream Haswell designs peaking at 4 cores, the jump up to 8-cores will instantly result in some impressive performance increases in applications that are heavily multi-threaded. All Haswell-E, Core i7-5000 SKUs are going to be unlocked for easy overclocking. As you'll see in a couple of pages, my results in that area are going to drastically change overall performance comparisons.

Haswell-E is based on the same 22nm process technology as the standard Haswell CPUs, but with an increase of the transistor count from 1.4 billion to 2.6 billion, thanks to the doubling of processor cores and because of the massive 20MB of last level cache on-board. Die size jumps up to 355 mm2 on Haswell-E compared to 177 mm2 on Haswell.

Although there are (officially) three processors launching today, we only really have a single part in for testing, the flagship Core i7-5960X, which marks the return of Intel Extreme Edition CPUs. Unfortunately, that also means a return of the $1000 price tag! The rated specifications are mind blowing though: 8-cores and 16-threads, quad-channel DDR4 memory support and 20MB of LLC. The base clock of the processor is only 3.0 GHz with a peak Turbo Boost of 3.5 GHz, but overclocking beyond that is going to be really easy it seems. As we have seen in previous E-grade processor releases, we have 40 lanes of PCI Express, though fully PCIe 3.0 compliant now.

The 140 watt TDP is about 10 watts higher than the Ivy Bridge-E i7-4960x.

The other two models being launched by Intel have some different numbers in front of them. The Core i7-5930K drops from 8-cores to 6-cores (still with HyperThreading) and the 20MB of LLC does down to 15MB. You still have DDR4, quad-channel memory support and 40 lanes of PCIe 3.0. The clock speed increases by 500 MHz on the base clock and 200 MHz on the Turbo Boost speed, resulting in better performance for single threaded applications.

The Core i7-5820K differs even more. Core count remains at six, though PCIe support goes from 40 lanes down to 28 lanes. Clock speeds are 100-200 MHz slower than the Core i7-5930K as well. That 28 lane PCIe configuration might seem like a big hit for some buyers, but I think when you realize that the Core i7-5820K can still handle three PCIe x8 slots (for triple graphics cards, for example) and still have 4 lanes leftover for a PCIe SSD (or M.2), the majority of enthusiast will be able to deal with the drop from 40 lanes. Of course, that price delta helps as well - the Core i7-5820K will run you just $389, compared to $583 for the Core i7-5930K and $999 for the Core i7-5960X.

But let's not forget the recently released Devil's Canyon CPUs. With a price tag that is $50 under the cost of the Core i7-5820K, the Core i7-4790K only has a 4-core design and DDR3 memory support, but those cores are running 700-800 MHz faster than the lowest priced Haswell-E. For buyers that are concerned about single threaded performance, a 4.0 GHz base clock speed could look pretty tempting over the 3.0 GHz base clock of the Core i7-5960X. But buyers more interested in multi-threading have options with both 6-core and 8-core Haswell-E launching today.

Later we'll show you how the Core i7-5960X and the Core i7-4790K compare (as well with many other CPUs) in our benchmarks. Next, let's learn about the new X99 chipset and what the platform brings to the table.

Amazing! Wasnt expecting that high of an overclock with 8 Cores, the power consumption , nor the h100 being able to maintain it below 80C at 4.6. Wow. Intel did a great job and The Asus Deluxe looks stunning. Thanks for the review Ryan!

Decent performance. Would have figured it would be a little better in multi-threaded applications, but that may be the clock speed holding it back a little negating the 2 extra cores.

Despite all that. It's mouth watering, but I'd never pay $999 for it just how even extreme users will tell you those $999 Intel parts are a joke and that's just a very high premium for those 2 cores unless you're running some serious applications.

8 cores, or the maximum for a server part, ray tracing will eat all those cores/threads, and still take hours. It's time for the GPU makers to get some Ray tracing hardware, in a massively GPU parallel type of SKU, and bid goodbye to the CPU for all graphics workloads. I'm talking thousands of cores doing Ray interaction computations, and not even the Xeon Pi can keep up when simulating billions of rays with multiple, per ray, interactions through multiple transparent, and semi-transparent surfaces. It gets hairy fast, with rays, but those images can not be simulated any better way than the original way the eye gets its information, from those trillions and trillions of photon interactions. Even for, Non Ray Tracing, serious applications, better to LAN up some less expensive boxes together and do some work on a home based cluster, there are some fine Linux Distros, that will enable some damn good asymmetrical multiprocessing among wired laptops and PCs, and those inexpensive AMD APUs/motherboards can be LANed up just fine.

I'm sure you are familiar with nVidia's latest Titans and Titan Z (dual core) which has 5760 CUDA cores which is aimed at 3D rendering and games. Then there is the Octane rendering program/plugin which renders on the CUDA cores. I would say rendering is already moving to the GPU and some people have been doing it for years but it is now becoming more mainstream and more affordable. No more waiting for Intel. They promised 32 core processors by now years ago. Well I am not waiting for Intel anymore. nVidia has it going on now and for the future. All you need is a quad-core intel processor then stick 4 Titans on the motherboard and now you have the equivalent of a super computer for rendering. That's 11,520 cores.

Infreakingcredible CPU! Fantastic work by a Intel and Asus! Thanks for a super review, Ryan, and I'm still blinking at your overclocking results. Price and power consumption aren't exactly bargains, but I'm LOVING the fact that specs like these in a microATX box may finally push Thunderbolt into the mainstream, with consequent drops in prices for TB gear.

Excellent review as always Ryan! The question is, will i ever be able to afford such a monster of a cpu.

My one and only question for you is in the testing, setup and SiSoft Sandra page. Why did you list the MSI A85 (Trinity) board when nowhere in the article was it even mentioned (let alone even closely compare in the stack)?

Come on Nvidia, get a Power8 license, and build a line of Home gaming servers, with Nvlink, that's 12 cores, at 8 threads per core for the Power8, for the trust fund kids and your Titians! All on a mezzanine module! People with money want to game too. Yes Nvidia, get power8, and you will not ever need an x86 license. Apple too, license some Power8s for your Mac Pros, and stop giving your stockholders money to Intel, yes ARM for iStuff, and Power8 for the Mac pros, and eventually for you macbooks, those P.A. semiconductor folks have such a fine pedigree(Alpha 21064, StrongARM, others), and don't worry any more, about licenses transferring, because Power8 is up for license, just like ARM, and Apple bought you with couch change, so there is plenty of R&D funding to do with Power8 your P.A. semiconductor magic! Refrence Power8s to the mac pro, and Power8 derivatives to the macbooks. New ISAs, no problem for Captain Cook, he has chests filled with royal jewels, and gold doubloons, enough to port OSX to any ISA, x86 be damned! Hell, the Good Captain, just sealed a handshake with IBM, for some cloud connected iThings, why not get some of that juicy Power8 going on the Mac Pros. the more People that license the power8 ISA, and refrence designs, and start fabbing their own flavors, the less High performance home computing will cost, maybe even more than 40 PCI 3.0 lanes for less than $300 on the CPU SKUs!

Clock for clock Haswell-E is about 15% faster than a 3 year old SNB-E. Eight cores makes sense if you need or want them. Otherwise, not much of an incentive for SNB-E owners to upgrade until Skylake-E perhaps.

I used to like having the latest and greatest, but this 5-10% clock for clock increase per generation BS is wearing thin. If an 8-core Haswell-E could consistently OC to 5GHz for daily use it would be another story. Unfortunately, they can't and I doubt that 4.6GHz is the normal as well. The average is probably around 4.4GHz for the 8-core.

yea maybe true but i agree on holding onto my sandy e it has been @ 4.9ghz 24/7 for years. i have a pretty good custom loop but still. I don't think i will be upgrading my cpu for some time. Hoping skylark e can do it for me. I am really starting to think the overclocking days or starting to fade. Sadly to.... Only thing that i see myself upgrading for is new features that come to surface. Even then i will be getting a e series cpu that I hope will overclock well. It will be really hard to move onto a cpu that can't oc as good as mine. I would settle on 4.7ghz but i doubt that is even in reach the way overclocking has been the last couple of gens. Sad had High hopes for haswell e. Good cpu but not enough to spend my money on. I guess i will keep my saved money for another generation or to. Fingers crossed amd brings something to the table so amd can finally pull there heads out of there asses.

I agree, after seeing these gaming benches.
these games aren't taking advantage of these cores, only the ghz.
i'll be waiting out for broadwell,skylake unless haswell-e refresh can take advantage of games then.

I have both the Ivy Bridge 4930K and the FX8350. Both are wonderful processors, and without a doubt I use the Intel system for converting media - it saves hours, but every time I see that performance for the dollar chart I love the fact that I own an AMD CPU. With respect to value - it is tough to beat and it is the choice I use when building additional machines and ones for family members. No guilt and good feelings knowing I spent the right amount and made people happy.

Look around: Broadwell-E isn't scheduled until Fall of NEXT year (2015), or over a year away. And Skylake-E may be more than double that. And then Cannonlake...well, with all the problems with the XUV sources and such, who really knows?

Ryan, which Z87 board did you use for the multi-GPU test? If it's the same Intel DZ87KLT-75K you used for the rest of the review, I don't think the PLX chip adds additional graphic lanes, it just allows them to add thunderbolt and extra expansion slots without affecting bandwidth to the USB and SATA controllers. In which case it's still running 8x/4x/4x, which might explain the frame variance in BF4 at 4K?

Was the nature of the AMD Radeon cards "dramatic bug we found in testing" associated with the multiple GPU set up or something else? Specifically would there be a problem if using a single AMD Radeon graphics card on an X99 mother board?

I wonder how much difference Broadwell will make in comparison when it comes out- while it looks like there is a difference in bandwidth, it looks like there was mot much change in performance I could attribute to DDR4. The monster cache was also a ? to me. Perhaps that helps with some DCPs? At any rate, I was hoping for a more definitive toe-to-toe performance change.

I have the new 5960x and i think people miss the point of the product "THIS IS NOT FOR GAMES". I am a 3d artist and having to wait too see where you messed up in your renders is KEY, you have no idea how hard it is to make pretty artwork on a i5 or lower chip.

If you want to render footage for youtube or just video/photo editing then dont buy this chip, its a waste plus it shows the world you have no idea what this chip should be used for.

This chip should be used for 3d artist's who cant buy a super computer but would like fast renders for stills or short animations but saying that i would think for a long animation you would use an online render farm for the fished peace. Yes gpu rendering is great and becoming more mainstream but even these render engines use the cpu with the gpu to make the renders even faster "the cpu will never go away".

Anyone wanting to judge this cpu against another needs too pick just 3d rendering as the benchmark and nothing else, its intels fault that they dont know how to market there cpu's (this is a xeon based cpu and people want to play games on it lol)

GROW SOME BALLS INTEL AND MAKE A CPU RANGE FOR 3D ARTISTS THAT IS NOT A £2000/3000 CHIP (WE KNOW YOU CAN DO IT) we dont need to render a whole animated film but too make high-end images fast so we can learn our craft faster is a must.... we make your games and sell your products with our 3d skills, why not have more of us???

Well thats my rant and if you check A1OFFENDER on youtube that would make me happy ohhhhhhhhhhhh and i will say one thing that alot of people dont seem to know, this cpu will give you less frame dips in game but if that is your only need for the cpu and can afford it, do it (so many people say this chip wont help gaming but it will help with the frame dips but is it worth the extra doh???)

While I don't see the need for 2 (or 3) HDDs in an HTPC, it is because of noise and extra heat, more so than the loss of space. They had the space, since they wanted to make it the same width/depth dimensions of typical home theatre hardware, so they put it to use.